Matter of Matteo (Commr. of Labor)

134 A.D.3d 1307, 20 N.Y.S.3d 915
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 17, 2015
Docket519037
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 134 A.D.3d 1307 (Matter of Matteo (Commr. of Labor)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Matter of Matteo (Commr. of Labor), 134 A.D.3d 1307, 20 N.Y.S.3d 915 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 27, 2013, which dismissed claimant’s appeal from a decision of the Administrative Law Judge as untimely.

By decision dated January 9, 2013, an Administrative Law Judge affirmed an initial decision of the Department of Labor that, among other things, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause. Claimant’s appeal to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board was not filed until February 25, 2013. The Board dismissed the appeal as untimely as claimant did not set forth a reasonable excuse for the delay. This appeal ensued.

We affirm. Labor Law § 621 (1) requires that an appeal from a decision of an Administrative Law Judge be taken within 20 days of the date the decision is mailed or personally delivered, and this time requirement is strictly construed (see Matter of Stephens [Commissioner of Labor], 119 AD3d 1258, 1259 [2014]; Matter of Buchkin [Commissioner of Labor], 115 AD3d 1107, 1108 [2014]). Claimant’s request for an appeal to the Board was not made within the statutory time period and good cause for noncompliance was not set forth by claimant (see Matter of Area Emporium LLC [Commissioner of Labor], 115 AD3d 1096, 1097 [2014]; Matter of Palmatier [Commissioner of Labor], 63 AD3d 1329, 1329 [2009]). In view of the foregoing, the Board’s decision will not be disturbed and, accordingly, the underlying merits of the denial of her application for unemployment insurance benefits are not properly before us (see Matter of Stephens [Commissioner of Labor], 119 AD3d at 1259).

Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Egan Jr. and Lynch, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Matter of Watts (Commissioner of Labor)
2020 NY Slip Op 474 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Matter of Page (Commissioner of Labor)
2017 NY Slip Op 5498 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Matter of Davis (Commr. of Labor)
144 A.D.3d 1307 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Matter of Paladino (Commr. of Labor)
140 A.D.3d 1496 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
134 A.D.3d 1307, 20 N.Y.S.3d 915, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-matteo-commr-of-labor-nyappdiv-2015.